E DINDtl RC:ll ARC:lllTEC'TllRK RESEARC: U

16

Anatomy and Anthropomorphism: Architecture and the Origins of Science

Scott Drake

Scott Druke is a lecllfll!r al 1/1e Lo11i.T Laybo11n1e Sniitlr Sc/roof of An:llilect11ni am/ De.Tig'1, U11i1•ersity o.f So11tll Amlruliu, Adelaide where lie ;,, c11rnmtly con1pleti11g l1i.r research towun/,, u Plul.

Ahstract

Since U1e writing!! of Vitntvim1 in U1e firnl cenhny AD, the ll!IC of the hmnon body o!I a metnphoricol ond iiymbolic referent ho!I provided wbot is pcrhop11 U1e most prolific trope for nrchitc:cturnl theoiy. Tite imoge of 'Vitmvion Mon,' wiU1 limbs oul!ltrelched lo touch U1e circle drawn from its novel, took on porticulor signilicnnce during the Rcnni11soncc as architects published their own inlcrprctulions of Vitrnvim1' Te11 Boob. For lhe.'le writers, the body, 011 microcosm, wos lhc best ovoiluble meon11 for representing the order of the cosmos· the world as o whole. Yet, ju . ..t as Ute body WO.'I being re<li:1eovcred a!I Ute primary referent for nrchi1ecture, the underi.1anding of the body wnll being lrnnsfonncd. Inherited medico} text:i, namely those of Golen, were being complemented by direct ohservolion of lhe body through dissection. The published re!t1dl11 of unutomicnl studies were highly influential, giving rise lo new conception:i of bodily slntclure nnd function. As orchitect11 and onotomists exchanged mctophor11, methods and imoges these new umlcrstondings of the body come also to oITc:ct architecture. l11e dissection of the body trom1fonned ideas about U1e constitution of knowledge nnd about how thnt knowledge wo:i to be obloined. ·111e method:i of onotomieol study were fundamental to the then emergent diMcipline of 11cience, models of cosmic unity were rendered untenoble by U1e practice of partitioning. Moreover, Ute direct inve.~ligntion of objcctM come to rcplocc textual nuU1ority in U1e conception of bolb onnlomy ond orchitecture.

lntmductlon

111e primary model for unulogies between bodies and huil<ling11 i:i that of Vitruvian Mon, with arms reaching out to touch the circle drawn from il:i ccntre.1 Tiie circle connect!! U1e outer pnrt11 of the body to U1e novel, the nalnrolly given trace of its origin. ·me inherent unity of the circle iM !!CCR lo reside in the body, with part:-i of the body combining to mnke up the whole. Vitmvim1 observes thut lhis rclotion between ports nnd whole :ihonld also he observed in orchitcctnrc, since nature wus the model for the architecture of the Ancienb1.2

17

EDIN DU RGll ARC:lllTEC:Tll RE R ESEA RC:ll

llie correspondence of the parts to the whole ill achieved through proportion, a numerical relationship to be observed in orchitccture.3 l11e source of the orchitccturol ideas prcl«:nted by Vitruvius ill no longer oyoil~ble to u~ ~ut the model!! of unity inherent in the work reflect those occumng m the wnhngs of Plato und Aristotle.

With Ploto'!I tronscendcntnl philoi;ophy the essence of mon, the immortal soul, take!! up il!! temporary position in t11e body anti is to be found in the h~~· tl1e place of reason. l11crc it is complemented by t11e mortal soul, found w1tlun Ute body. The mortal soul hos two dislinct ports: one co~cemed with cou~nge, passion, and love, to he found in the chest; tl!e other hem~ the lo:-ver, onuno.1, port of mon concerned wilh the hunger hy winch the.hotly 1s s1.1stnmcd. M~~ 1s bolh soul ond body togetl1er. 4 For Ari:;totle, the soul 1s whot onnnnted oil hvmg things. Mnn differs from onimuls in possessing tl1e copoc~ly for reason but both ore olive because they ore pcnnented hy a soul. 111~ soul is .nnl lro~scendent b~tl ill to he found within; intmancnt in each nml every llYing hemg. In its mmll hos1c fonn the so11I is n11tritive or vegetative, thnl is, it is able to feed ond reproduce itself. The Nonl of onimols is further copoble of perception nnd sensotion for which it USC!! tlic organs of the (animal) hotly. 11ic 00111 is ~tc p11~se for wh~h the body exisl'I and since Ilic ports, notumlly oduptcd lo tlieir funcliom1, comhme to fonn the whole, their purposes contribute lo tlic cxprcs.-iion ~f the semi ~1rou~h the body. Aristotle nppliell to Ute body his own conct.'('11 ofumly as dc:icnbcd m Book Eight of the l'oelic.f. For Aristotle, the whole i:i un assembly of parts such thnt no port con he oddcd nor removed without detracting from the whole. In order to under:itnnd the soul Aristotle i;tudied the bodies of animals, Inking them opnrt in order lo undcnilond the 1m1110se of eoch part:~

Thill ideo of the whole us o comhinotion of partll thot ore both necessory nnd sufficient boll proved highly innuentinl. ~rchite~turnlly, it _is in or~cr to. nchi~ve such wholenesi; tltol buildings should he like bodies. V1tmvmll npphell tlui; notion of unity, not only to huildingN, but nlllo to th~ mn~e o~ suhjcctll t~tot mm1t he studied by the orchitect.6 One of thol!C llllhJect!I rn lustory, wluch muy be nece:isitoted hy the use of ornament, about w~1ich the architect "oug~1~ t~ rcn~er on occolml to inquirers." It is here tl111t Vilruvaui; de1~on.o;trolc.-i n fom1hn~~ with the violent origin!! of nrchitecturc. TI1e use of coryuhd~, for example, ong1~olell in the defeat of Cnriu by the Greeks, who then ensluved its women all o wommg.

And HO the an:hilccl~ nf lhlll limc de!ligncd for ruhlic huilJing11 figure• or matrcm• rt11ccd In CllfTY hurdcm; in order th11t the 1t1111W1mc11l uf the Kill uf the C111i11tiJ WtNncn might IHI known tu ru~terity and hililnrically recorded.'

Similarly, oiler the Sport1ms dcf~utcd th~ Pe~si.on~ o colonnade wus er~ted:• George Hersey argues that the v10lence 11nphc1t m these commemoruhon:i Ill typical of cl11s.11icul omrunent.9 Jn particn!ur, he or~uc.11 th~t ornament, rot11er. thun simply n rcmnnnt of ohsolete constmchon teclmt~tllell, t!I a trope of -~ucriflcc1. They originate in prnctice.11 of war where tropes, tn the fonn of lropluell, were

18

ANATOMY AND ANTllROPOMORPlllSM

erected on the batllefield.10 TI1ill practice echoc:i the Nymholic rc:allscmhly of pnrt.'1 of the onimol during lmnting, both os penance and to guarantee a future so11rce of food by preventing tl1e complete destruction of the onimot. In o :iimilor manner, the ornamentation of temples is seen to eonlltitute a reall!ICmhly of tlie parts of i;acrificial viclim.'I, cnohling their hodie!I to endtire in the detnils. 1l1ei;e omomenl!I orollC initially from the tmm1fonnotions of body ports, with teetl1, hones, and skins becoming dcntils, triglyphs, ond tympono. TI1ey also arose from the decoration:c U!l!IOcioted with l!Dcrifice - Ton111 moulding!! ut the bo!le of cohunn:i evolved from ropcll used lo hind feet ond capitol!! were derived from ceremonial heoddrcsscs. Ornament served lo inunortulisc the victint!I of llllcrifice and of wor. TI1e purpollC served is not pl1rely memorial, h11t of committing to stone n record of tl1e outcome, os confinnulion of the propriety of suffering. 11

The Body Reborn

With the sprcod of Clirilltionity throughout Europe ofler Ilic foll of Ilic Roman Empire the di:isection of humun bodie.'I waM forbidden. A11gu:1tine denounced dissection, along with vivisection, n!I horhoric.11 In acodemiC!I where medicine wos taught, llllch 0:1 &demo in tlic eleventh and tweUU1 centuries, the hodic:i of pigs were tL'!ed for onotomicul demonstmtions. However, in the early thir1centl1 century the practice of Notnrul Philoi;ophy t.'IUerged, intended to counter tile Cuthar 'heresy' thut all mutter was evil.1

l Natural Philosophers idrove lo demonstrate that all of Nature'll objects were purl of God's creation and were, Ums, imhued with the presence of God. Arislotle's idem1 of dc:iign and tclcolo1;1y merged witlt the Plulonic idcn of the body 11:1 microcosm revealing the body of mun, created in God's own imnge, Ull Ute end or gool of the process of creation. Although the body w11s liuhle to tempt the soul with earthly desire:i, it was nonethelc.'1!1 on expression of tl111t Nonl in the world. As o conlle<tnence of !hill view the pro:1crlption agninst anatomii>ing the humon body wa:i relaxed, for nowhere else could the full perfection of God's creotion he l!Cen. Tims, in the fo11r1ecntl1 century luunon bodies hegan to be u:icd in anatomical demonslrotionll, imch 0:1 t11osc pcrfonncd by MundimL'I al the academy at Bologna. 1l1e onntomy lecture wo11 u demonstration, both medical nnd philosophical, pre:1cnlcd to student!! lltudying the two fields concurrently. Aristotle'!! work fonned the foundation for philosophicul inlllrllclion while the so11ree of anotomicol knowlt.'tlge wus Ilic texts of Golen (o Romon physiciun from the Second Cenlnry AD). Galen's writings wcre the only imrviving workll on human onotomy ovoiluble for thi.'1 purpol!C. llic combination of the two field.-; reveals the ccnlrol importance of t11e anatomy lecture: to i;how the hotly, eloboroted tlU'ough Golcn'll text, 0:1 tl1e pince of tlie .m11/, explained tl11011gh the wriling!I of Ari.'ltotle. The fonnot of the lecture involved tlic profcs.'lor reading aloud from a text derived largely from Galen's originul:i. 1l1is wos accompanied, or even followed, by the dis.-ieclion of the body perfonned hy a surgeon over o period oft111Ce days. In tl1ill

19

EDINBURGH ARClllTEC:TllRE RESKARC:ll

fonnot, the profei;.'K>r did not need to engage with the corpse; it Woll i_nci:cly U1ere to conf um wluit oppeorcd in the text. It wn.'I the text that was 011U1ont~hve; .t~1crc wos nothing to be learnt from the body thot did not olrcody ,oprc:o~ m wr1tmg. Titis method followed for over 200 ycors, meont tluit Golen ll wntmg!I wen: to fonn tbc fou~dotion of onotomicul practice d11ring the Rennisi;once.

nie sequence of dis.o;cction worked from tit~ oulllidc in, st~rting wit~1 those or~s mollt liable to decomposition. However, !lull contrasts with Golen s :mggeshon thot anatomy should be leornl by slotting with U1e bones. Galen's text present!! o decidedly struchtrnl model of the body, explained t~ugh the. metnph~~ of bo~y 08 building no doubt instilled in him dunng educohon by lull foU1er. Golen 11 f~Uier, Nic~n of Pergommn, wo!I connected with the ~uilding trade ir,t th~~ temple oren of 0 lown famous for its sanctuary of lhe heohng god Asclepms. · Golen Woll clearly influenced hy his surrou~dingll in hi!! c!1oice o~ career h~1t, all lhe following possogc shows, he wus also influenced by lu!I father s profcsllton.

Tiie n11ture nf 1111 the hone.~. Ill' I ~aid. iic tu he thoroughly teaml either from m11n, fmm the hotly uf' the ape, nr helter li'nm hulh. Then one ~hould. mnve nn lu the 111ullumy ur the n111t1clc~. For lhClle !\YU p11rt~ nf the hudy unJcrhc 1111 lhc nlhcnc, like the found11tiu1111 uf 11 lmilJing.

16

Although Golen wus interested in lmn.tun nnn~omy muc~t of l!is work woi; deriv~ from the bodies of opcs nml other nmmnls smce the d1sscchon of human hodtcs wns not pcnnillcd in U1c Rome of l.ti!I dny. Whnt ~owlc~ge of lnunnn n~~tomy he gained come from skeletal remnuts and from lu!I nppomtment D!I phyN1cinn to. the gludiotors. 11 Golen 's writiJ\gs focus upon structure ~nd or~ full ot orchitechtrol mctuphors nc<1nired from his fnther. And, fo~lo,~mg An~totle, a.n undcrstonding of the slrnctnre of ports is deemed ellsenhnl m revenhng their function.1R

Tite arrival of Ute printing prcs.o; in lhe lif\eenth century led to n dramntic in~rem1e in the rote of dissemination of anntomicnl knowledge. W~r~s pubhshcd, however, were lurgely editions of, or vuriutiom1. on, <?alen'11 ongmuls. Furthe~ dissemination was enuhled by the movement ~f d1sscchons fr?m Ute lecture hulls and into theatre!!. Anatomy lectures evolved mto demons~ahons wtd nttructe~ n wider audience. Pcrlwps lhe grcntcst contributor to onnlotmcal kno""'.ledge d1.1r!"g the Renai!lsonce wo!I Andrea!! Vc.'lnlirn1 (IS l 4-1564) who first slud1cd mcd1cmc in Pnri!I before going to Pnduu where he wos appointed demonstrator or ll!trgeon. He quickly gained recognilion for his i.'kill!! nt dissectin~ and U1e drowmgs l!e mode, to oiisist the demonillrntion, prov~d populo! wtlh the students. Tlus ini.'(>ired him to publish woodcuts for wluch he cnhsted the help of Jol.mnnc.'I Stcphonus of Cnlcur, o 11tudcnt ~f Ti~iun.19 1:J1i11 lend cventu?llY to whot ts no"". Ilic best known work of onntmmcul 11lustrntmn of the Ren~1s11nn'7 De H11~1.c1111 Corpori., Fuhrictt of 1543. While Vesnlius wo!I f?mcd for h1!111Urg1.col prec1~1on, it wn11 hi!! willingnes!I to di!lngree with outho~1ty thnt earned lum not~riety. Cunningham recount!! on incident where Vesnhus, os demonstrntor, begm!I to

ANATOMY AND ANTHROPOMORPHISM

expre!lll some of hill own ohscrvalion!I which were nt variance with U1osc given in Uie lecture. Yet mUicr than ceding to the authority of the profCllSOr ond, hence, to Utc authority of Golen 's text, Vcsoliu.'I continued to follow hi!! own cour.;e much to Ute delight of the studcnts.2° Vc.'illliu11' faiUt in his own likills led him to prefer U1e eviJe11ce of the bocly over that provided by the text. TI1ot does not menn Utot he rejected what WIL'I written hut, rnther, thut he wos detennined to test what he hod rend Uliing dissection. And in hili willingness to conlinn theoretical propositions wiUt evidence, Vesulius' remained faithful to Galen's originol project, even though it meant contradicting much of whot hod been written. Eventuolly, Vesolinll come lo realise the odvontnge he had over Gelen, namely, thot he had access to human bodies for dissection whereas Golen hod had to re.'IOrt to u11ing apes. And, Um!!, he renli11ed his own tnsk, which was to develop for the first time a comprehensive anatomy of the lmmut1 body; thus appeared Ute Fuhricu. As the title imggest!I this i11 n work dedicated lo describing the 'fohric' of die hodfi, the mnteriul ussemhly from which actions and usei1 con be detcnnined. 1 On the frontispiece, Vesnlius i11 shown pointing upwards. sugge.'lting that he i!I continuing U1c project of revealing the work of God.

llte ochievemcn1!1 of Vc.'llllius arc remembered n.o; o significant port of U1c birth of 11Cience during the RcnuL'l.'IOncc - where grcot discoveries were mode by greal men using their innate 'genius' und rejecting the mantle of uulhorily and truditi~n.whic.h hod previously impeded others. Ctmningham, however, arguCll !hut tins 1s a n11~tccnU1-century constmct promoted in lnrge part by Burckhurdt's study of U1c ltahun Rc..'tluismmce published in 1860. Romuntic ideulH of individt111l creativity were projected buck onto these dillC0Vc..Tie11 wiU1 little concern for dtc lil>ciol, cultural, economic und tc:clmological milieu within which Utcy occurred. Ideuls of genim1, he nrgncs, foil lo explain why U1e analomisls chose to emulate the Ancienlll in Ute first pince und, thu!I, wl~ tension oronc belwccn texl nnd body os alternative sources of authority. Moreover. the idea thut the Renni!lsance is on c!lscntiully seculurising movement is not borne onl by the intentions of the unolominlll. The body wus unulomised, soys Cunningham, only os u meuns to belier undcrsland the 80111 conluined U1ercin:

Every 111111tomi"I up to 111111 well hcyonJ lhe Mixtecnlb century looked 111 the buJy 1111

boing, in unc way or unolher, the inMlnunenl uf the 110111, and if Ibey were inlcreatcd in 11n11lumizing it, ii w1111 l>ucmu11 it wwc the inMlrumenl oftho Mu111.1 .•• J TI1e 1111111 iit wh11l 11m1111111izing wu 11IM1ut.'.t'

In contrast, Cnnninghum i.11ggcnts that developments in onatomy cnn better be under!ltood in litdit of religion!! evc..-utll at tltc time. Rother than describing lho:>e dcvelopment11 Dli an 'onatomicol renoiiisonce' he orgue.'I tlwt U1cy lwvc much in common with the Refonnution. Challenges to the authority of the church initiutcd by Erusmu!I and curried through by Luther centred upon the importance of individual intcrpretution. For Luther, Chrislillnity was n religion of personul engagement where it wu11 c11ch imlividuul's duty to reod the Word of God -

21

EDlNDll RC:ll A RC:lllTECTll RE RES EA RCll

available to them in the Bihle.14 11ic Bible, not the church, wus tlic 11ource of all

authority:

I h. confrontation with the Jefc:11den1 of the Catholic Church, Luther'll cb11llen~e : .. ~':1ways fur them to idiow • to literally point out with their linger • the te~ll in the bible on which their claimM were lmilt. Only thi11 would count All 11uthonty to l..uthcr.ZI

His WD.'I not o rejection of Chriiitian faith but n strc.o;s on the importance of direlct · t 'th the Word Tiie !learch for on authentic church b1111ed upon t 1e

e~coun ::.i~I lion of enci1 of it~ memben1. While there is no direct evidenc~ t~ ~~=~ ve.!tfus with tlte refonned churcl1, Cnnn~ghnm 1111ggests ~hot V~~l.111~ innovations in anatomy reveal him to be acting D!I if he were n Lu tc~. , . ~11 !s

rticulnrly evident in his frequent references to the h1unn~ body m1 a text · ll~s inie book of ottr.'I, the human ho~y. "16 Ar. ~11ch, t11e body 1s n r.onrce of outhonty ovoiloble to be rend by oil. Cunmngl111m wntes:

Nat only docM Ve"ali1111 in~i~t on the rrim11cy of 'the ~ord,' lh~t iM, the body, o~er · t t --·• •····'ition hut like Luther with the D1hlc, he 111trud11ce11 t11uc:h111g wnttcn cx aou .. - • • • • d itM visual and pointing, into both the rr11cticc ol' flllhhc 1111~\!,Hlll:Ung 11n

rcllfeKcnhllion, 11.~ aiJ!I to \Yil11es11ing the truth fnr illlCllelt.

Anatomical Space

Anntomy demonstrations enjoyed n pop11l11rily tlml ~enl beyond mere intcresl. i~ tl workin s of tlu: body In Tiie ll<Hly Embluzomul Jonntlum Snwdoy expluuts tl~~I anntoi~isntions were. populur, public evcnls nttrncting on edu.coted ~ul1~1rol elite and nro~tsing omong tliem 11 combinnlion of morbid nnd erotic for.cmntton. To ovoid the '1aboo againsl violnling .t11e body ufler dc!1lh only. tl~o11e .who bud forfeited the right to integrity were du1sccted. TI1e bodies ~~ cnmmuls, nlrendy punillhed Uuough public nets of l.:xecution, were further port11tonc:J lo re~cnl t11~} internal workingr. Anntomir.utmns cume to replace more vmlenl onm1

nrtition that w~~e ur.cd to enr.urc puni11lunent of body and 2:oul~ tlms, ~emonslroting the complicity between i;overei~n and divine power. 11us gave the nnntomislll on agency that ensured their own .'llntns n~ t~~cy extrncted atonement from criminnlr. in t11e fonn ofknowlcdgc. Snwdny writes.

22

(Al nlltt1t11iZ11ti11n lllkcM plac:e JIU tl111t, in \icu ur ll fonnerly C1Hnp\ete ·~iJrb :;ie~ 'b d ' of knowledge 11nJ llnJenllllllding Clln be C:fCQ\ed. A.'( the (lhysicll 1 Y IM lr:g:icntcd Ku the body ofundcrMlllllding iK held lo be KhllflCd 111111 f~1m1c~ ( ... ) The 11111tu~ii~t . then, iK the pcnmn wlm haK reduced 1111c body m ur er !" 1111Jer11t1111J il~ 111urrhology, 1111d thm1 ltl pre11crvc murrl111logy al II Mer d11te, Ill

uther hudicM, el~ewl11m:. w

ANATOMY AND ANTllROPOMORl'lllSM

In the rich symboli!lm t11ut is the frontispiece of Vclllllius' Fubricu the r.ctting itself is muclc complicit in tlae dcmom1trotion. Most tlteolrcs et the time were circular or ovoi<l in pion - u geometry tliul dcrivei; in large part from t11c position of the body nl il'I centre. Unlike olhcr thcntrei; the point of focus, the corp!le, lny flnt ond wo.o; llms vii;ible from ahovc and from ull i;idcs. However, the Vesuliun frontii;piece, Sowday observes, depicts a 'cro11s-section• of nn nnntomy demonstration.

It iK wc lhuugh the complc:tc Rtntclure, the Knrmunding bwci\ica ( ... ) with ilM mMMivc 11rchitcctur11I MllflflllrlM, together wilh the cnm:cntric rinGH nf hcncheM, haa been croMM•lle~1ionc:d alone the diameter which pasKeM through the c11d11vcr.)1

TI1c sectioning is, in port, a pictorial device allowing l11e scene to be depicted with appropriate verticnl hierarchy inclu<ling the suhlle ge1d11re of Ve.o;nliu11' fmger raised skyward to indicate the divine source of what he revenl!I in the corpse. II nloo allows U1e return of the eorpi;c to o near-vertical poi.ition, negating its death 0.11 it gazes fondly nt ils di~ector. llte 11ectioning 11uggests t11Dt wbot is being vieww is not n 11pnti11lly ir.olnlcd event hut one whor.e significnnce rcachc.<1 t11e heavens. At t11e centre of the drawing we !ICC not a man but a woman, or more accurately, her womb, which Vcsntius lays open for our inspection. Snwday arguer. thnt, with this frontir.piece, Ve.o;nlhL'I is challenging Copernicus' view of t11e 1mive:rse which luid hcen pnhli'ihcd curlier lliul year:

In the Ft1hrlcu, the nn11t11111ic:11I univcnie rcvulve11 uruund the conjunction ur the womh and the tnmh within the 'magnilicent temrlc' - Cupcrnicua' own phflllle fur the univer11e illlcll: It ix not the ~un, the title p11ge of the Fuhrlct1 inMiMIK, which liea 111 the centre uf Ille knnwn univence. The world ia neither geocentric, nur heliocentric, but uteroccntric: the womb ia our puinl uf origin, hence illl ccntr11I pl11ce111cnt in the image . .,

111e dis11CCted body, combined with the i;keleton located uhove it, pre.'lCllt for the viewer n 'drmnu of life und <lenth' - u reminder of their own mortality. The hnilding itself is impliculcd in this <lromu: its sectioning revealing Ute coJ>mic implications of the nnutomir.t's work. The innennost secret of the body, its locution D!I the source of life, is lui<l bure by the unntomist un<l, with it, the concentric r.phercs of t11e coi.1nos. Along with t11e hotly, "the temple of onatomy [ ... ] h1111 itself been bii;cctt.'tl for our ini;tmction."'' Fur more than llte viewpoint of the peri.')lCctive rcprc.'icntntion, tlu: J>cctioning give11 n privilcgc<l view into l11e interior of body, buil<ling nnd world. The anatomists' knife reveols nil - the ~'}ll1ercs uml U1eir coocentrit:ity are Villiblc ull at once.

The reproductive capacilic.o; of the female body, writes Snwdny, hod been conquered un<l ui;urpcd hy t11c creutive cnpncitic.o; of the mindr. of men. Along with t11c ilnuge of Vitruviun Mun, t11c idea of creative gcniur. le<l tltc Rennir..'lllnce lo he regurded, by Bun:khurdt nnd ot11ers, 011 an age churucterir.ed hy n 1111ifie<l sense of :cclf11ood. Suwduy, in contrnsl, argues U1ul unnlomi!llltion wuii highly

23

EDINBURGH ARC:lllTEC:TURE RE~EARC:ll

influential end thot the "the urge lo particularize" reached into every fonn of cultural endeavour. The influence Wo!I !lo pervo!live, he argues that the Renai!l!IDnce can be rcgnnlcd o.'1 a "culture of dissection. •tl4 He writes:

( ... j partition Rlrclched int11 ull fonnR ufHucial and inlellcclual life: logic, rhetoric, painling. archilcc:lurc, philuftuphy, medicine, u well UK poetry, pnliticK, the flllllily 11nd lhe Klute were all polenliul KUhjectK for diviKinn ... The ~ullern uf all lheKa different fonnR ofdiviKiun w11R derived from the h11mW1 h11dy."

The images in the Fabrica and many conlemporory anatomical texb owe os much to the meam1 of inquiry os to the body itself. 1l1e interior is mode visible by ope11i11g the body, the skin shown cut and folded hock, thus, the act of dillseclion is described along with the results. To render the interior of the body using ))C'.rllpective! it ill firs! neces!lllry to overcome both its opacity and its compaction. ll1ol 111, the hody mmll he .Tpatiuliz1ul, opened ond partitioned by the h~nd so Utot the eye can follow: "ll1e body, then, bus been carefully rearranged, with slntclures removed, or pmihed to one 11ide, or • froch1red' lo enable urt to intervene within the body c11vily.'',6 ll1is spati11li11alion of the body tronsfonned it from 11 compounded mao;11 into on unnngemenl of purls who11e relative positions could he shown. The three-dimensionnl complexity of the hotly and the depth heneolh illl imrfoce ill transformed into o two-di11tt.'D11ionul image through o combination of dissection und pcri111cctive representation." Tite penetration of vi!lion into the body interior is only possible when preceded by the hands. Tite discontinuity of 11urfuce iii lost us the interior of the body i11 revealed u.'I on upportiorunent of space. Moreover, the spotinlity of the body, os microcosm, becomes melonymic of space in geneml: "Space, the po11itioning of the hody within n thrce-dimensionnl matrix, wm; the key to analomicul underi;tanding. ( ... ) Tite study of onolomy w11.J the llhtdy of Ute orgonizotion of i.')lnce. ,.;iR

TI1e import11nce ofUte sputiul continuity helween interior and exterior is revenle<l in ilh1slrolions which iihow floye<l corpses 11lon<ling in idyllic londscope11. !nlem.led to show mu11culol11re, o crucilll clement of the fabric of the body, U1e 11n11gell do nwuy with the enclosure of the skin by omitting it ollogelher. Continuity is further emph1111i11Cd by the fuel !hot the figures nre still olive adopting Ute pose!! of cla'lsicul slutuory, unperturbed by their condition. In the~ eqmmimity the figure.'! revcol 11 complicity in their own dillseclion. Sometimes this complicity ill more liteml n.'I figure.'! hold hock their own !!kin to revcul interior orgon.'I. In Utiii woy the onnlomillls' involvement with dcoUt ill elfoccd by the significance of whnl U1ey reveal:

Amtlnmy iK fthown lo be 11 ";icm:c which (cunlrnry 111 what we mighl expect) KCcntN lo 1111im111a the hody, nnd endow ii (albeit lemporurily) wilh u life of ilM uwn Mo lh11t it could llKKi~I in lhe e11g11ging ~peclacle nf ilK own diviNion.lY

The imnge11 show u corpse thnt ill nciUtcr n pnssive nor reluctnnt subject of on11tomi11ution hut is, inslend, nn nccomplice lo the proce11ll of revealing it:i

24

ANATOMY AND ANTllROPOMORl'llISM

internal fabric. ll1c absence of the nnutomi.o;l from U1e images furU1er emphosiscs this 'rhetoric of llclf-<lisscction.' TI1e violence of nnolomy is obviated as the corpse ill shown to willingly give up its secretll without suffering. The 'notumlne.'!.'I' ~fthe procc.'l!I is usscrted where the body, de.,'Pite being diiisected, is oble to retom its pince amongllt the world of the living. The clollllical mins within the londscopes emphosi!IC tlte continuity of the anatomical knowledge with thol of the oncicnts whilsl ulso idre:1sing the incvitnhility of death nn<l decoy - the mutnhility oflnunon affoinl.40

Conquest of the Body

TI1e i.-ymbolism of the Vesolion imoge11 serves lo hide the violence behind the nnotomi110tion of the body. Whot is presentcJ D.'I nolurol orises only us o rei.11lt of the ~notomilllll' negotiation of a variety of social and religio1111 prohibitions in relnhon to U1e body. While rcllulting in ever more precise orticttlolion.'I of l111m11n o~oton~y, dis_seclion involve11 o tro~sgrcssion o~ !llnacture.'I of tuiily. Tims "[ ... ] o dissection might denote not the dehcole sepomt1on of con.o;tituent !llntcturc.'4 hut 11 !nore ~J?len~ ·r~duction' ~nlo portN: 11 bmtal d~sme1.nhcnnent of people, thi~gs or ~dens. T~ull 111 emphn111sc<l. by the onnt~m1sts' mvolvement with the legnlly 11~1po~ed violence ~f execution. By cutlmg up corpse11 the onatomisl11 were vmlntmg the domam of the <lead. An uct tlmt i.i1ould h11ve brought infamy nnd condemnnlion. Thi!! was avoided, in purl, by uiiing the bodies of exccutc<l criminals ogninlll whom the violence of dissection wn11 a moller of ju!llice hut it w11s a.lso ~cnus~ the onntomisls offered, in exchange, n complete view of the body mlcnor wluch could then he used to preiierve the he11!Ut of other hodie.'I.

What !node this violution of the <lend necc.o;sury wu11 the dnngernu.'I and mystenous ~~lure. of the ~ody int~ri.or. u.sing tleml hodie.'I prevents the pain caused by v1v1sectmn nnd its o~ocmhon with lorture.42 For the some renson Ute common scientific strategy of experimenting upon one's own body was dcnicJ lo the nn~tomists. To brooch. the ~terior of the body co1111e11 puin ond pos!libly deuUt. llus threnl marks the mtenor of the body 011 the most private of spaces. Moreover! expluins Sowduy, "[ ... ) the interior rcces11es of the body ore not merely pnvot~ to .o~hcr.i, but pecnliu!Z priv~te - ~mt is exprC11Sly forbidden - to U1e owner or m1ub1tor of the body. · The mtenor of the body, deiipite hc:ing olwoys present for tt!i, ill nol 11voil11hlc lo us. II can neither he 11een nor controllL'<l. When l~tc body interior bccotnCll apparent ii is usually indireclly vio lruces thul find their woy lo the surface. TI1eir appcnmnce, while bringing the interior to our utlention, further ClllJlhuiiiscs the mystery und danger of the body interior.44

Timll, Ute ~dy interior must he 11nder11tood indirectly, endlessly deduced via represenlnlton one.I truce. ll1e bodies of crimin11ls, deemed to hove forfeilcJ Ute privacy of their interior, become the focus or on outwardly directed guze. Tite

25

EDINBURGH ARC:lllTEC:T\IRE RESEARCH

corpse, laid bore by the anatomist, bt..-comc.'I a reOC(:tion that alludc.'I lo our own interior. Sawdey writes:

( .•. J it ix, perhapc, thiA very imp<>,Mihility ur gazing within our. uwn h11d.ic11 w~iclt m11kea the aight or the interior ur other hmlie11 llU cun1pelhng. Dented direct experience ur uur11elve11, we can only explore other11 in the lmpe (or the rear) th11t thi11 other might alxu he u11.4S

Sowday del!C:ribes tbe anatomical 'conquest' or the body OS having its mylbicul counterpart in the story or Perscmi and the MedlL'iD. l11e Med1111D, one or t!te three gorgon!!, would pctriry anyone who s~w l~cr. Per!ICt~s wa11 a~le to.decap1ta~e her with his sword by viewing her reflection tn U1e pohshed slneld ~1ven to hnn by AUtene. Titc anatomi11t'11 knire ond mirror, like the :iword and slnc~d of PcrllC~ts, were used to conquer the danger lying deep within the hody, tbe sight or wluch bring!! deoth. The dongeromi interior, like the Med11.!la, wa!I conquered by indirection (m1ing shield/mirror) ond partition (11wo~1re~. What the Medm;on myth ol:«> rcveahi is that die thr~t pose~ hr the mtenor l!I more ~han thot. or dis:rolution and <lc.Dth. TI1c Vesohon rronttllfllCCC llhOWll Uie onolomtllt revcuhng the grcutc.'lt mystery or ~he .body, nmnely its crentive co.~city, occu.rri.~g o~ly within the rcmale intenor m the i;hopc or the womb. 1 he Med.IL'iD, wntC!I Saw<loy. "stonds ror rear or interiority; more often than not, a i.-pcctfically mule rear or the fomnle intcrior."46

Renaissance Bodies

TI1rougho11t the Renaill.'lllllCC, while the image or Vitrnvinn. Mnn WOll con.timwlly reitcrolcd, the partitioning or U1e body in analomy come to mOuence nrclutectuml lheory. In the work or Fronccsco di Giorgo Martini, during the lot~ fiflee~th century, plans, focadell, entohlnturcs and whole citiell ~r_c ~ra~ with ho~1cs superimposed. Jn one illuslmtion Frnncei;co shows a rmml1111:1ty w1U1 on~toimenl illustration oll a skclelon ill jnxtnposcd with a figure showing proportion. Yet while the hody ill the !l<>urcc or principles. these mt~sl be. complemc~ted by t~lenl nnd experience applied in accordance with the d1s~rehon and gutdance ot . the nrti:d. In whnt is pcrhapll the belll known or U1~lcn111:1.'lll~e tcxlll: .L~on B?thlltn Alhcrti'll 011 tlw 1111 of Builtli11g i11 Tim Boob • o detmled fom1hnnty with ~le interior of the body ill demonstrated. Alhcrti's descriptions or .c?nstn1ct1on techniques make rl'C(111cnt, metaphorical rcrcrcncc to Ute body descn~tng part.oi or the building as being like: boncll, ligmncntll, flesh, ond ~Cl!.~ 11!111 sug.gest~ a fumiliarity with Golen while frc11uenl reference lo the hod1cs of anunals tmphcs a fomiliorily with Arii1lotlc's workli.49 So loo doe11 hill explanation or IM!au.ty: "Bcuuty is that remmned hannony or ull die parts within a body l!O that notlung may he added, taken away, or alten.'tl, hut for the wor;ie."'° In the hook!! ~r Schostiuno Scrlio, published from 1537 onwanls, an otti~ndc to 1111rfocc that tll clearly inspired by onotomy i11 dcmonstrnlcd. For Serho, knowledge or the

26

ANATOMY AND ANTJIROPOMORPlllSM

interior is vital for lbe correct reprem:ntotion of i.1trfoce," while s1ufoce is cntcial ror shielding from vi!lion those parts that are nece!l!IDry but unoppealing.n Y cl in Scrlio's work die idea Uwt principles are to be followed in accordance wilh the discretion and guidance of Ute arti:.1 is reiterated. In the work or Palladio Ilic organic correspondence or interior and exterior is emphosised by lhe ll!IC or combined 11CCliom1 and elevations enabling hoU1 to be :een together juxtaposed in a single drawing.

Science and Method

While the 'culture of disscclion' hud made possible o new conception or the architecturul inlcrior, a more profound change was underway. Leonardo Benevolo, in hill historical account or Rennill.'lllnce Architecture, de:icribcs the emergence or modem science Dll conlltituting "crisis or llensihility."') The incrcusintt precision of the dcscriJltion or the World in material tcnnll Willi seen Dll

huving a more reliable ncccss to tntth. Correspondingly, whatever could not be :.1udicd in scientific tcnns Wall rclcgntcd to the realm of ur1.

TI1e ri11e nr i;cicncc, rcmuveil from the !l)'lllcm 111' the lirlll it1< m11in 11rgu111e11t fur 11l11hility 1111d 11uci11l 11tility, ic. itK v11h1e 1111 a vehicle for knowledge; 1111iiltic mimcKiil could no longer he the imitutiun ul' reality anJ h11d In become the imit11lin11 nf enmli.11111."

Tite effect upon architecture or thill division Willi lc.'ls exlenllive U111n that upon other orts such 011 painting or music. This wos due, not only to the mmal rc11i11tance to chonge caused by socio·technicol methods or orchitccturnl prod11ction, but ol:ro to ils lock or representational content And 11u1ce architecture could not direct the emotion111111 cITcclivcly ns other artll, the crisi11 Wa.'1 munifc11t moslly in contentions differences in the 'guidunce' or the an:hitcct. Bcncvolo exp loins:

In reality the criMiM nf 11rchitccl11r11l culture, which wwc coming lo 11 he11il during tho t6:ZO'll, CllllMiMted in the CnJlllpKe t1f the ohjcctiVc criteri11 ur choice typic1d ur recent tradition; lhe11c ohjcclive crih:ri11 were replaced not hy other criteria uf the Mllnle k.ind, hut hy tcndenliollH pn>p!llllllit, anJ Ul\&:n by II lllllllher or l:OnOicting and c1"11plcmentary onc1<; the uutct"llC of lhiK crittix w1111 1111t the furnllltit"1 ul' a new c1Mnmon repcl1oire, 11.~ 11n allcnwtivc to the prcviom unc, hut the Mtar1 of a Jchlllc for an iniklinile period."'

TI1is crisis is seen to remtlt from Ilic increasing influence or !!C:iencc at the time particulorly with the publicutions or Golilco, Kepler, Bucon ond Descurtcs in Ute curly !ICVcntccnth century which dcscribt..'tl the motion of the carlh ond other planets. These idcus were reinforced by invcnlions such all U1c pocket watch, which ollowcd more precise divisions ond measurements or objects, spoce und time. y cl U1c meU1ods nnd metaphors for oil or Utelle fonm1 or scientific in()lliry

27

EDINUtlRCHI ARC:lllTECTURE RESEARCH

were heavily innuenced hy the onntomi:;ution of the body. !'•is is particulurly evident in the work of Rene DcllCOrtes. As Snwdoy explums Descortc.ci woll familiar with the work of Vc.o;11li1Lci and ~nt eleven yenr.t in Amllterdom ot o time when public anotomy wn.ci nt its pcok.56 Dei:corte~ did not'. however, engoge in the;e anatomies hut, inlltcad, rei1ortcd to the dts.'ICChon .of ~mmol ~orcollses. In both his phllosophicol description.'! of the body ?'Id the mind •! con~m~. Dll w~ll os his emtmerotions of scientific melliod, the mfluence of dt!lsectton ts read.tly apparent. Descnrtes' partitioning oflhc world into objecl'I (re.t exte11.w.1~ nnd.mmd (re.T cogitum) occur11 most profoundly at tl!e level of the body. 11~e 1denltty of the individual, the fonnerly complete unity of.body an~ ~~ul, 1:1 se~~rot~d. Moreover, the i;cparation is hosed upon the body s suscepllbthly to pnrhhonmg through dissection. Sawday writell:

The impo••ihility of HU,tuining the 'link' between "~ml und bndy WDl4. it~~lf h°:"cd on D rudicul anotomy of the humun HUhjc:ct. Indeed, 1t w11.1 the NUNccpt1h1hly ul the hody (L~ uppo"ed tu lhc mind) to the pruce"" ?r.diviNiu~ whi~h cun~rmeJ.thc JiHtinctiun hctween hndy ond mind inherent wlllun the. Curte~1~n project; ~',!lee IK1diu could he divided whiM mind. uppeored to he entirely JCHIHtunt lo d1v1mm, then OH DeHcur1H uhNcrvcJ in the Nixth of the Medllutlons on the Ffrst Phil~.rophy. nu mutter thut UH u 'thinking thing' the Ml!hject m11~ _h11ve re~cc1vcd ilHclr IL~ •unc "inglc 1md cnmpMc: thine'. the hu1111111 MllhJcct wuH l11l11rc11tcJ.

TI1e body, relegated to lhe world of ohjccls, is sec:n to act solely in accordunce with the lows or mechnnics. And, like II mnclune, the body could besl be understood by tuking it uporl. Anything t1111t was too complex to ttn~e.ri.1~nd us n whole could he purtitioned into its comitituent elements. llms, porllhonmg us u method of in<tlliry became ccntml to Dc~curtes' work. A!I o 'rnl.c' ~f method he slated that he would "( ... ) divide each difficulty l 11hould exam me mto n!I muny part!I a!I po!l!lible, aml us woukl he re<1t1,i~d the .bctt~r to solve it."~R A.llhough Descartell is remembered for fonnulunng sctenhfic method, the 111c11 of partitioning wos not new. Sowduy describe!!, following ~alter <?ng.' that 'method' emerged in response to the problem of t11e systematic orgnnu111t1~n of knowledge.~ While the arrangement or clemcnl!I ~f ~·sc~ursc WO!I nec.e!l!lllnted by the invention of printing, the patterns of !1puhuh:1a~10n and orden~g were derived from the onotomised body: "(TI1c} or<Jcring of d1scotir.;e WD!I okm lo lltc progre!l!live partitioning of the body in nn~to1~cal demomilrnlion, nnd 11111!1

indebted to o lunguugc of the body at every poml.

The revolution in the anal01nicul underslunding of the human body epitomised by Vc..,ntilL'I' texts is u visih!e nm.nifi:.~.1ution of a d.eepcr revolution: Pructiti~nern of anatomy emerged victorious m the confrontuhon between ancient texts und their own meU1mls of direct visual evidence. WiU1 approval from the clmrch, Ute anatomists munnged to overcome tuhoos aguini1t the violation of corpses, offering in return o grophic demonstrnlion of tl~e wonder of ~od's creation. 111e delicate proce.cis of dissecting n body gave nsc to a~ ~nl!rely new ~1odc of investigation involving 11 systemutic procedure of pnrt1honmg the subject und

28

ANATOMY AND ANTllROPOMORPlllNM

recording the rCllults. Dissection of the body provided the model for the organisation of knowledge. Titi!I gave rise to a whole new series of metaphors which ollied intellectual clarity with the v~11al clarity that penetrated the body when unoccluded by the veil of i;kin.61 In t11e nnnlytic method of 11itnplificotion through partition described by Dc.'ICartc.ci the influence of dissection is palpable. Similarly, the i;cientilic process of the 1ub11lutiot1 of infonnution mimicii the net of reducing o whole body to ports thot are then arrayed across the dis!lection table. 61 In this way, ll1e process of partitioning and describing tlte fabric ofU1e body wa!I replicated in the study of the natural world. For architecl'I, the move awuy from textual authority wos to prove problematic. Without an objective referent architects resorted to one of two altemutivcs: either adopting a variety of ntles from nature applied according to their own discretion and guidance or revelling in Ilic freedom brought about by the absence of n1lc.ci. Attempt!! to provide a taxonomy of architectural dc..,ign in Ute form of typological 11tudic.11 of the French Academy were of limited 11ucce.11s.63 So, too, were modemi!lt efforts to ground architecture using the idea of 'function.'64 Tiirough di!lsection, the reduction of the body lo on object amennble to partition, the use of anthropomorphism had been rendered untenable. For the dissected body, no longer animate, i!I insufficient for the purpose of anthropomorphi!lm - the imparting lo urchilcclure of lhe living force oft11e body.

Notes and Refcrcnn:s

1 Vitru~ius [Murcusj Pollio, De Ard1itcc:11tm, tran.o;luled by F. Granger, London, Loch L1hrary, 19311. "Now lhe tu1vel is natumlly t11e exact centre of the body. For if u man lies on his hack wiU1 lumdo; nud feet outspread, and the centre of o circle is pl11ced on his navel, his figure [sic) and toes will he touched by the circumference. Also u s1111nre will he found described wit11in the figure, in the snmc wuy us 11 round tignre is produced. For if we men.o;ure from the 11ole of the fool to the top of the heutl, und upply lhe memmre to t11e out11lretchcd hone.ls, the brem!Ut will he found e11u11l to the height, just like site11 which urc m1mm:d by mlc." 3.1.3·4, p. 161.

2 "In like fashion the members of temp!CN ought to hove dimensions of Uteir scvenil partii unswering suituhly to the general sum of their whole magnitude. 1l1erefore if Nature Im . ., planned Ute lmman hody oo that the memhcr.i corrc.'!pond in their proportions lo its complete configumtion, Ute Ancient!! seem to have bud reason in determining thut in the cxe1..·11tion ofllteir works tht..'Y should oh.~erve on cxuct adjustment of the several members to the general pattern of the plan. Therefore, since in nil their works they bonded down orders, they did liO

espcciully in building temples, Ilic excellence und the fuults or which usuully endure for ages." 3.U-4, p. 161.

EDINDl.IRUll ARCJllTECTURE RESEARCH

3 "The plnMing or temples depends upon sy1mnetry; and the method or this architects must diligently comprehend. It arises from proportion (which in Greek is called u11ulogiu). Proportion coni;ists in taking a fixed module, in euch cnse, both for the ports or Q building ond for the whole by which the method or !>)'mmetry i.'I put into prnctice. For without :.1mmelry and proportion no temple con have o regular plan; thol iii, it mu:.'l lmve an exoct proportion worked out oiler tbe fashion oru1e members ora fmely-shopc:d htunon body." 3.1.1-2; p. 159.

4 On Pinto 1md Ariillotle and their fundumcntul significance lo western philosophy see Richard Tnrnns, Tlie Pu.t.tio11 of the Westen1 Mimi: U11tler.Tlur1tli11g tlie ltleu.T tlu1t Have Slwpetl 011r Worltl View, Ballantine Books, New York, 1991. On the relation between body nnd mntl in both Pinto nnd Aristotle see Andrew Cunninglmm, Tile A11utomicul Re11ui.uU11ce: Tile Re.n1rrectio11 of tile Auutomicul Pt'ojecl.t of tire A11ci1ml.t, Scholar Press, Aldcrshot, 1997.

5 l11is is explained as follow:1: "Now, 0.'1 euch or U1c ports of t11e body, like every other instrument, is for Ilic snke of some purpose, viz., oomc action, it is evident thnt t11c body m1 n whole mtL'lt exist for the soke of sawing nnd not sawinp. for U1c mike of U1e sow, hecoll!IC imwing is t11c using of the in.'llnnnent, so in one woy U1e hotly exists for the mike of U1e soul, nnd the parts of U1c body for Ilic soke of those functiom1 tu which they arc nntmully adopted." Aristotle, 11w Pat·t.t of A11imt1b, ns <tuoted in Philip Stcudmon, Tiie Evnl11tim1 Of De.dg1u: Bio/tiglcul A11ulogy ;,, Arcl1ilecllll1! e1ml tlie Applieil Art.,, Cambridge University Pres.'I, New York, 1979, p. IO.

6 Countering the possible objection thut the vuriety of subjects needed to be Ntudied by nn nrchitecl is too lurge, he urgucs thot they must he perceived ull interconnected, "For a gcnernl education is put togeil1er like one body from its members." VitruvilL'l De Arc/1itectmu, I. I. I I, p. 17.

1 Ihid., 1.1.5, p. 11 .

1 "111erc they ploced stuh1es of Uieir c11ptives in burboric dress - punishing their pride with dei;crved in:.·ults - to :mpporl U1e roof, thnt their enemic.'I might qnoke, feoring the workings of imch hrnvery, nnd their fellow-citizens looking upon 11 pattern of manhood might by such glory he roused nnd prcpurcd for U1e defence offrcedom." lhid., 1.1.6, p. 11.

9 Hersey, Tile Lt>.fl Me1111i11g of Cle1.uict1I Arcl1itect11re: Spec11lt1titm., 011

Onum1e11t from Vitnll'ill.T 10 Ve11l11ri, MIT Press, Cumbridgc, Mussuclmsetts,

1988.

ANATOMY AND ANTllROPOMORPlllSM

10 "Troph!cs, thnt is to llllY manikins fonncd of the unns, wcopons, nnd helmeb1 of the slo~n ~nemy ~ere set up to op~cose their shades and to prevent the gods from pumshmg U1e vtclori> who hod killed diem. l11eir Jcnths were thus 'turned 1

tropcd, from murders into sacrifices." Ibid., p. 9. '

11 ·~he l!u!1'an co~tcnt. of U1c Doric, Ionic, ond Corinthian ordcra is both potent ond 1mphc1t. But an Vatmvins, the more sculpturnl cousins of the Uirce basic onlers arc fully anthro~-.and gyneco-morphic. 111e elements of uncestrnl strife an~ the founding of bmldmgs. as n woy of m~ialing or rcsol ving tlmt strife arc ohm .present. In~e.cd, the sl~~1es of the carynttJ nnJ Persian porticoc.'I give to orc.luti;cture a dast!nctly pumltve O.'lpccl. Tiacy reinforce its role ns the exhibito of JlL'lt1cc 11ccomph:d1cd." Ibid., p. 75. r

12 Cunningham, 711e Amtlomicttl Rctwi.f.tt111ce, p. 37.

r> ~n .the ri:ic of Noturnl Philooophy aml it:> relutionship to anotomicnl pruclice :;cc 1h1d .. chapter 2, uml pnssim.

14 "l11e sequence of lcnming onotmny illDt Golen recommends in 011 tmulomicnl proceclr1rc.,, ~11:1 U\Ut one should first lcnm uhout tbe bo11e.T, because U1cy piny U~e some role m ~he humnn body us wull:; do in houses. 111111 Galen took :.11<:h n vie~ of the .rclutmn of U1c skeleton to Ilic flcllh and orgun:i mny owe something I~ Ins cxpenence of Ute building techniques of hill time - the use of lond-heuring p1llnrll ond henms, t!1c !.JlllCe between U1em being filled in with curtain wnlls -wad to the fuel thot Ins own fulher wns an architect by profession." Ibid., p. 27.

u <?wse! Temkin, Gt1/1mi.vm: Ri.te um/ Dec/i11c of u Meilicul Pl1ilo.voplty, Cornell Umvers1ty Prcs:i, IU1ac11 nm.I London, 1973, p. 3.

16 Outen, ns quoted in Cmmingluun, T/111 A1wtomit·ul R1mui.mmce, p. 27.

1 ~ Ajoh which, remarks Porter, "enlurgcd his unotomicnl nnd :mrgicnl expertise smce ~ound'I ulTord~ windows onto the body." Porter, The Gnmlt!.fl Betwjit·lt; Mu11kmil, Hurpcr Collins, London, llJIJ7, p. 73.

IR "l11c lltesis that Golen muinluins in 011 1/1e 11.te of purt.f is thot nil the parts of U1c lmmnn body w~re mn~ for n pu~se; that .they were mndc in U1c he:>t wny to fullil t~mt P"l"J?Osc, thol U!1s purpose 1s the evidence for, ond the cxpres:iion of, Nntur~ s foresight und wmlom; und thot onutomizing to reveol the 11.ve.1 or t11e ports ~s U1e key to both understanding nnd npprccinting thnt purpose nnd hence U1c wisdom of nature." Ibid., p. 311.

19 Ibid., p. 93.

20 Ibid., pp. IOJ-111.

31

EDINBURGH ARClllTECTURE RESEARCH

ll It is according to Cunningham, on 'cmutomy of.ttniclllrc': "Whot V.esolim1 sec.'I i's' the humon body, built 011 "'"' .mpport1ul by the bon~s, to wl!1ch the ~111.1cl~:t are ullucluul~ it hos greut ,1y.vtcm.t of w.v.td.t (the vem!I, ortenes, ond nerves)." Ibid., p. 120.

22 Ibid., pp. 191-197, nod po.'lsim.

n Ibid., pp. 196-197.

24 1llis was in port due to the prolirerntion of tex~ii mode potsi~le. hy the roduction of the printing presK circn. 1450. On the mnuence o prmtmg, sc~. hr b th L Eisenstein T/u! Pri11ti11g Pre.u '"' "" Agent of Cliungc. ~~~~1~11icutio11.,. ""'' C1,'1111n1/ Trun.~(ornwtimu i11 Et1rly·1J10tli!ni E11rope, Cumhridge Univer.iily PreKs, Cumhridgc, 1979.

2~ Ibid., p. 218.

16 Ibid., p. 226.

27 Ibic.I., p. 227.

2R JonnUum Sawdny. nw Bocly Emblt1ZtJIWtl: Di.u11clio11 aml tlw H11mc111 B0tly ill Rei1t1i.v.muce Cilltill'I!, Routlec.lge, London & New York, l 995.

l9"1lie deniol of burinl [ ... ] woii intcm.lec.1 to evoke un n~dcd dimensionfto cnpitul · · I I 't d ipon lhc widespread hehcf that luck o a proper

~!:~i~1~:.~~o~nmt:C1; 0 J~;~ce to offender~ and ll~eir fumilies, bul i~volv.ed U1~ po~1humous pllniKhmcnl of l~le crimi.nnl's soul wl!!ch .would ~Ol~es~}~l~!~e U~~· cmains loy ungnthercd w1thm snncltficd ground. Ibid., P· 5 · n I .

r . 1 . t cl monstrntion of power sec Foucuull, Di.1cip/i11e ""'' Prm1.d1, pums uncn os o e . • · pns.o;im.

30 Snwc.loy, Tl1r. Bocly Emblt1zmwtl, p. 2.

31 Ibid., p. 67.

31 Ibid., p. 71.

33 Ibid., p. 71.

34 Ibid., pp. 2-3.

JS Ibid., p. 3.

36 Ibid., p. till .

31

ANATOMY AND ANTllROPOMORPlllSM

37 Ibid., pp. 95-97.

311 Ibid., p. 86.

39 Ibid., p. 113.

40 Ibid., p. 115.

41 Ibid., p. I.

42 Sec Ctmninghom, The A11utomicul Rc11ui.um1ce, p. 22-25, and pas.o;im.

~1 Suwdoy, 771e B0tly Embluzmrecl, p. 15.

44 "TI10se trncell, oflcn (though not 11lwuys) encountered at momenls oftrntuna or potcnlinl danger- the glimpse of o wound cavity, U1c Ouid11 of the body and its expelled 1111bslance11 in 11ickncii.'I or in childbirth - ore greeted with vnrying dcgrcc.'I offoscinolion 11nd horror. [ ... } Tite interior of lhe body is perceived by u truce which moy oh;o become n token, n lwrbingcr of dis.'«>lution." Ibid., Jl. 8.

45 Ibid., p. 8.

46 Sawd11y, 17w B°'ly Emblt1zmwcl, p. 3.

47 Leon Battisto Alberti, 011 the Art Of B11ilcli11g i11 Te11 Boob, trunslotcd by Jo:;eph Rykwert, Neil Leach and Robert Tavemor, Cumhridgc, Mnssoclmsetls, MIT Prcs.", llJ88.

4• Ibid., 3.14, pp. 85-86.

49 For example: "The physicians have noticcc.l lhnl Nature was llO thorough in fanning lhc bodies of animuls, tlwt she lefi no bone separate or diKjointed from U1c rcsl." 1 bid., 3 .12~ p. 81. 'Physicinm!' here meaning Nolurul-PhilollOphers.

•111 Ibid., 6.2, p. 156.

'1 Sawdny writes: "Anatomy and perspective shared u common tendency. Both,

Serlio !.1tggestcd, were concerned wilh volume mther Uum surface. Any nllcmpt ot rendering surface convincing wilhout on 1mderst11nding of volume was to he content with Ute 'bore shcw of superficienciei;' rather tlwn the full complcxily of U1e body flmctioning within i-Jlnce." Suwdny, The Bocly Emblt1z01re1l, p. 86.

~1 "For just us in the lmm11n body there arc i;ome purls that ore noble nnd beautiful and 0U1crs Umt nrc ruthcr ignoble nnd ugly, bul of which we hnvc the grenlcsl need and indeed would nol he nble to live witboul; llO nlso in buildings

33

EDINBURGH ARC:lllTEC'TllRE RENEARC:ll

there ought to be some parts that ore rc.o;pecluble und honoured, und othcr:i less elegant, but without which the fonner could not be free and would lose port of their dignity and beauty. But just m1 the Ble~<ied Loni lws orrungcd our organs so that the most beoutirul ore in the most exposed ond visible ploces, and the Jc.o;s allractive in hidden places, so loo we, in built.ling, will locote the main parts, which are to be looked ul, in visible places, and the Jess beautiful us for from sight as possible. And in U1ese lullcr parts we will put oil the ugly thini,tM of tbe house, everything that might cnuiie Hhame ond uglify the most beoutiful purls (2.2)." Serlio, us quoled in George Hersey, Py1/wgoreu11 Pulace.T: Magic um/ Arcl1itectt1rc i11 tl1e /tuliu11 R1mui.uu11ce, Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1976, pp. 113-114.

'3 Leonordo Bcnevolo, Tiie A,.cliitect11re of Ille Re11ui.m111ce, Transloted by Judith Landry, Routledge oncl Kcgan Paul, London and Henley, 1978.

54 Ibid., p. 594.

$S Ibid., p. 596.

56 Sawday, Tl1e B0tly Emhl"z1111e1/, pp. 147-148.

~1 Ibid., pp. 145-46.

'~ Rene Descartes, Di.,co11r.Te 011 Me1/iotl; us <Jttoled in Geoffrey Broadbent, De.tig11 ill Arc/1itect11t'I!: An:liil1!c/11re t1111/ the H1mu111 Scie11ce.t, John Wiley & Som1, Chichc.'ller, 1973, p. 60.

~9 Sawday, Tlie Bo<ly Emhluzo11etl, Chapter 5. See uhm Walter Ong, Rumru: Met/10<1 ""'' tlie Decay of DiC1/og11e, l Inrvard University Press, Cambridge, Ma'lsnchtL'lelts, l 95R.

60 Sawday, Tlie Body Emhl<tzoiwtl, fl. 136.

61 Barbara Mario Slafford, Bmly Crilici.vm: lnwgi11g tlw lh1.,ee11 i11 E11/ig/111mme111 Art allfl M1!<lici11e, Cnmhridge, Mus.'!,: MIT Prcs!I, 1991, p. 54, und passim. StolTord wrile!I: "An11tomy und ii!! insepnruble proctice of dissection were the eighteenth-century p11radigm!I for ony forced, artful, contrived, und violent study of dcpU1M. Metnphors of decoding, dividing, sepnmting, alllllyzing, fothoming penncated wuys of U1inking about, and repre.'!Cnting, nil branchc!I of knowledge from religion to philosophy, onti<1uoriunism to criticiMm, physiognomies to linguisticii, archaeology to surgery. Analogies of dissection, specifically, functioned on two intcrrclutcd levels. TI1e literol, corporeal sense derived from tactile cuts inflicted by uclunl instnuncnt!I. Digging knives, invading scis.'lors, shnrp sculpels mercilc!l.'lly probed lo pry apart and distinguish muscle from bone. 111e figurutivc sense played upon U1e nlltL'lion to violent and

34

ANATOMY AND ANTllROPOMORPlllNM

udversariol jabbing. Such excavation stood for an inveHti otive inte . metlio<I U1ot 1mc.overcd tbe d~1plicity of lhe worlll. Discuniive U~onght coll;~~ll~ powers of burmg abstraction whereby the lowly particular was m • 1 1;° seflo"!lte~ from the elevated genemlity. The trivial predicate wa11 se~er~n a ly !he iugmfica~t suhject, the unimportant individual was 11nbtmcted fr01:~111~ 1mpo~onl universal. Both meonings shared Ute connotation of 0 scorchin operation perfonncd on a n:calcitranl snbslonce One involved mnnnoi h' g the olher cerebral gro11ping. Each mag"C"lcd tli'e ... · · f pro mg, de · · · eo ·' ... nppmg away o excess by

composthon and fmgmenlulion for the purpose of control." p. 47. .

;ci~~~!~~~~~~~~~l~u~:l~o~:~~rL:nd~~~·~~;o~" Arc/1ueo/ogy of tlie llm11m1

u G. C. Argon, "On the Typology of Architecture .. Tran.'llalcd h 1 . Rrkwc:rt, Arr/1ilect11ra/ De.vig11, Dcccmher 1963 PP 564_565. S 1 . YA 0

1scph

Vidler, "TI1c Iden of T . 11 T r: • • • • ee o so nt 1ony 1810 .. 0 . . YJ>e. ie ransaonnalton of the Academic ldcol 17511

• • ppa.T111otu 8, 1977, pp. 94-115. ' -

~ ~~")' LALigoA, 1ibo11e Cm1c1!pl of F1111ctio11 ;,, Twe11tietli-Ce11t11ry Arcliitectmu/ n ict:rm, nn r r. UMJ Rcscnrch Press, Michigan, 1984.

35